Find a Lawyer

WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH CHAIRMAN versus MUHAMMAD BOOTA

Application under Section 38 Electricity Act (IX of 1910), Sections 24 and 26 of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Petitioners under Section 38, National Electric Power Regulatory Authority Act 1997 and Sections 24 and 26 under the Electricity Act 1910 Was given Disappointed by the electric inspector of the provincial government WAPDA (applicant), outraged by the order of the electric inspector, he made a reference to the provincial government / advisory committee under section 26 (6), Electricity Act, 1910, which was The dismissal was that under Section 26 (6), the Electricity Act, 1910, such reference was to be maintained which had no limitation while the respondents claimed that under the law the appeal was only before the Advisory Board, The time restriction was recorded. The matter was placed before the board and it is noted that an appeal was filed after the expiry of 90 days and it was not barred from being forwarded to record this order by the Chairman Advisory Boer. The appellant can inform the appellant accordingly that the correctness of the order Tanner himself showed that neither the appellant nor his lawyer were present when such order was recorded, so the above No one was heard before the order was approved. , Pointing to the question whether this was a reference or one of the appeals which was clearly established was that the applicants / WAPDA were not heard in the matter at the WAPDA (applicant) hearing. Should have had a chance because their case was that for a reference, the law did not provide any limitation. lawer from fb area from Sihala lawyer